Episode 6

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:02 > 0:00:03The British justice system

0:00:03 > 0:00:05is the envy of the world,

0:00:05 > 0:00:08but in the past, mistakes have been made.

0:00:08 > 0:00:11Between the year 1900 and the year 1964,

0:00:11 > 0:00:16approximately 800 people were hanged in the United Kingdom.

0:00:16 > 0:00:19Many of those desperately protested their innocence.

0:00:19 > 0:00:22Some of these long-standing convictions

0:00:22 > 0:00:24could be a miscarriage of justice.

0:00:24 > 0:00:26She's received most of the blows

0:00:26 > 0:00:28in this position once she's already bleeding.

0:00:28 > 0:00:30In this series, a living relative

0:00:30 > 0:00:32will attempt to clear their family name...

0:00:32 > 0:00:34Myself and my family

0:00:34 > 0:00:37have always believed that our great-grandfather was innocent.

0:00:37 > 0:00:39..searching for new evidence...

0:00:39 > 0:00:42I can make the .32 fire both calibres.

0:00:44 > 0:00:48..with help from two of the UK's leading barristers,

0:00:48 > 0:00:49one for the defence...

0:00:49 > 0:00:52This is a very worrying case.

0:00:52 > 0:00:54I think the evidence is very suspect.

0:00:54 > 0:00:56..and one for the prosecution.

0:00:56 > 0:01:00I'm still of the view that this was a cogent case of murder

0:01:00 > 0:01:03committed during the course of a robbery.

0:01:03 > 0:01:06They're on a mission to solve the mystery,

0:01:06 > 0:01:10submitting their findings to a senior Crown Court judge.

0:01:10 > 0:01:15There is a real risk that there has been a miscarriage of justice here.

0:01:15 > 0:01:17I will look again at the evidence

0:01:17 > 0:01:20in the light of the arguments that you both have put before me.

0:01:20 > 0:01:24Can this modern investigation rewrite history?

0:01:33 > 0:01:376am on September the 23rd, 1900.

0:01:39 > 0:01:41The body of a young woman

0:01:41 > 0:01:44was found among the sand dunes on Great Yarmouth Beach.

0:01:44 > 0:01:46She'd been strangled.

0:01:51 > 0:01:55A murder investigation led to a local guesthouse

0:01:55 > 0:01:59where the victim had lodged under the assumed name Mrs Hood,

0:01:59 > 0:02:01along with her two-year-old daughter.

0:02:02 > 0:02:06Seven weeks passed before police were able to trace her true identity

0:02:06 > 0:02:10as Mary Jane Bennett of Bexleyheath, London.

0:02:15 > 0:02:18Her estranged husband, Herbert John Bennett,

0:02:18 > 0:02:22immediately came under suspicion and was arrested for her murder.

0:02:22 > 0:02:25Unable to provide a convincing alibi,

0:02:25 > 0:02:27it took a jury at the Old Bailey just 45 minutes

0:02:27 > 0:02:33to find Bennett guilty, the judge passing a sentence of death.

0:02:33 > 0:02:36On Thursday the 21st of March 1901,

0:02:36 > 0:02:38despite fiercely protesting his innocence,

0:02:38 > 0:02:42Herbert John Bennett was hanged at Norwich Gaol.

0:02:44 > 0:02:46"I, Herbert John Bennett,

0:02:46 > 0:02:50"consider that I have been tried on suspicion

0:02:50 > 0:02:53"and not on evidence."

0:02:53 > 0:02:55Over a century later, Paul Fitchard,

0:02:55 > 0:02:58the closest living relative of Herbert and Mary Bennett,

0:02:58 > 0:03:02believes there are unanswered questions surrounding the case.

0:03:02 > 0:03:05Herbert Bennett is my great-grandfather

0:03:05 > 0:03:07and Mary was my great-grandmother.

0:03:07 > 0:03:09I can't see him being a murderer.

0:03:09 > 0:03:12There are so many pieces, different parts of the jigsaw,

0:03:12 > 0:03:14that just do not quite add up.

0:03:14 > 0:03:17So, who is the man behind the mystery?

0:03:17 > 0:03:21Born in the East End of London, Herbert Bennett was a bright kid

0:03:21 > 0:03:23who left school at the age of 13

0:03:23 > 0:03:26to work as a shop assistant and grocer.

0:03:26 > 0:03:31In 1897, aged just 17, he married his piano teacher,

0:03:31 > 0:03:33Mary Jane Clarke, two years his senior.

0:03:33 > 0:03:37Their daughter Ruby was born two years later.

0:03:37 > 0:03:39It's a tragic case.

0:03:39 > 0:03:41Whenever I think about Herbert and Mary,

0:03:41 > 0:03:46always, my mind goes to Grandma, to Granny, to Ruby herself.

0:03:46 > 0:03:48She was made an orphan.

0:03:48 > 0:03:52Desperate to know the truth, Paul has delved into his past,

0:03:52 > 0:03:56giving him an insight to his great-grandparents' relationship.

0:03:56 > 0:03:59You begin to form little personalities

0:03:59 > 0:04:01about the people that they may have been.

0:04:01 > 0:04:04I think they were both a couple of scallywags, to be honest.

0:04:04 > 0:04:08Herbert and Mary's relationship was marked by shady behaviour -

0:04:08 > 0:04:12a pair of con artists who orchestrated numerous scams.

0:04:12 > 0:04:15It's possible that that's what they were doing - ripping people off.

0:04:15 > 0:04:17I think the driving force was Mary.

0:04:17 > 0:04:20By June 1900, the relationship had soured

0:04:20 > 0:04:23and the couple were living apart.

0:04:23 > 0:04:24We know that they had separated

0:04:24 > 0:04:27by the time that she went up to Great Yarmouth.

0:04:27 > 0:04:30It was here, three months after the split,

0:04:30 > 0:04:32that Mary was brutally murdered.

0:04:32 > 0:04:37The big question is, did Herbert follow her to the coast to kill her?

0:04:37 > 0:04:39Myself and my family

0:04:39 > 0:04:42have always believed that our great-grandfather was innocent.

0:04:42 > 0:04:45I just hope we might be able to prove that that is the case.

0:04:46 > 0:04:49Helping Paul investigate his great-grandfather's case

0:04:49 > 0:04:52are two of the country's leading legal minds.

0:04:52 > 0:04:55Jeremy Dein QC is a top defence barrister

0:04:55 > 0:04:59with over 30 years' experience of serious crime.

0:04:59 > 0:05:04Reviewing the case for the prosecution is Sasha Wass QC,

0:05:04 > 0:05:07who has successfully convicted some of the country's

0:05:07 > 0:05:09most notorious offenders.

0:05:09 > 0:05:11- Hello, Paul.- Hello. - Nice to meet you.

0:05:11 > 0:05:14Before they begin their investigation,

0:05:14 > 0:05:16they have a word of warning for Paul.

0:05:16 > 0:05:21You, of course, are a descendant of both the victim

0:05:21 > 0:05:24- and the person who's been convicted.- Yeah.

0:05:24 > 0:05:25Can I just ask you this -

0:05:25 > 0:05:29if the judge determines that this was a safe conviction,

0:05:29 > 0:05:31- would you be able to cope with that?- Yes.

0:05:31 > 0:05:33We'd very much like it to go for him,

0:05:33 > 0:05:35but we are realistic.

0:05:35 > 0:05:37I just need to stress to you, Paul,

0:05:37 > 0:05:41that we can't simply revisit old ground.

0:05:41 > 0:05:43- That's not the way it works.- OK.

0:05:43 > 0:05:47So, the target point here is to find something in the evidence

0:05:47 > 0:05:51which is, you know, a new angle that can be put before the judge,

0:05:51 > 0:05:53and, hopefully, we can uncover that.

0:05:53 > 0:05:55We will update you when we have some news.

0:05:55 > 0:05:57Thanks very much for your time. I appreciate it.

0:05:57 > 0:06:00The barristers will re-examine the legal case

0:06:00 > 0:06:03while searching for crucial new evidence

0:06:03 > 0:06:05that could cast doubt on the safety of the conviction.

0:06:05 > 0:06:08Jeremy, look at this.

0:06:08 > 0:06:11They'll then present their findings to a Crown Court judge

0:06:11 > 0:06:13who could recommend the case for review

0:06:13 > 0:06:16or uphold the original guilty verdict.

0:06:17 > 0:06:22The first task is to identify the key facts of the murder.

0:06:22 > 0:06:24So, Jeremy, we know that,

0:06:24 > 0:06:28on the morning of the 23rd of September 1900,

0:06:28 > 0:06:32the body of Mary Bennett was found on Great Yarmouth Beach.

0:06:32 > 0:06:37She had been strangled with a single mohair bootlace.

0:06:37 > 0:06:40The first person to come under suspicion

0:06:40 > 0:06:43was her estranged husband, Herbert.

0:06:43 > 0:06:45And Herbert Bennett was, in fact,

0:06:45 > 0:06:49seen in Great Yarmouth at the time of her murder.

0:06:49 > 0:06:53The evidence that he was in the area is open to question.

0:06:53 > 0:06:55From the moment Herbert Bennett was arrested,

0:06:55 > 0:06:58witnesses were paid by the media

0:06:58 > 0:07:02in advance of giving evidence to sell their stories,

0:07:02 > 0:07:05and their reliability has to be looked at by us.

0:07:05 > 0:07:07At the heart of the prosecution's case

0:07:07 > 0:07:09were witnesses placing Herbert in Yarmouth,

0:07:09 > 0:07:13and a key piece of evidence - a photo.

0:07:13 > 0:07:16Mary was in the habit of wearing a gold chain.

0:07:16 > 0:07:18And, in fact, you can see it on this photograph

0:07:18 > 0:07:22taken three days before her murder.

0:07:22 > 0:07:24She's there with her little girl Ruby.

0:07:24 > 0:07:27When the defendant's lodgings were searched,

0:07:27 > 0:07:29they found the gold chain.

0:07:29 > 0:07:32We have a woman who was estranged from her husband,

0:07:32 > 0:07:35and when police searched his lodgings,

0:07:35 > 0:07:39he was found in possession of items of jewellery

0:07:39 > 0:07:43which she was wearing within days of her murder.

0:07:43 > 0:07:48All in all, Jeremy, this looks like a pretty strong case

0:07:48 > 0:07:50against Herbert Bennett.

0:07:50 > 0:07:54Jeremy has a difficult task ahead if he's to convince a judge

0:07:54 > 0:07:57that this case was a miscarriage of justice.

0:07:59 > 0:08:03In Great Yarmouth, the setting of this mysterious murder,

0:08:03 > 0:08:06Paul is meeting up with his daughter Rebecca, who lives nearby.

0:08:06 > 0:08:11- Ooh! Hello!- Are you all right? - Yeah, I'm all right.

0:08:11 > 0:08:14- You?- Yeah, good. Nice to see you.- How are you?

0:08:14 > 0:08:18Paul wants to see for himself where his great-grandmother was murdered.

0:08:18 > 0:08:21It is really eerie. It's atmospheric.

0:08:23 > 0:08:27Mary's body was discovered in a secluded area of South Beach,

0:08:27 > 0:08:29popular with courting couples.

0:08:29 > 0:08:31So, here we are.

0:08:31 > 0:08:34Her actual body was found in a set of dunes similar to these,

0:08:34 > 0:08:37but really in the position right underneath

0:08:37 > 0:08:40where that roller-coaster sits now.

0:08:40 > 0:08:45- She was found lying in the sand.- Yeah.

0:08:45 > 0:08:48Her legs were drawn up

0:08:48 > 0:08:52and her clothes were in disarray.

0:08:52 > 0:08:57There were witnesses that said that she had been seen with a man,

0:08:57 > 0:09:00- but nobody could identify the guy cos it was at night.- OK.

0:09:00 > 0:09:03They knew that there was a man crouching by her or over her...

0:09:03 > 0:09:05- Right, OK.- ..at the time.

0:09:05 > 0:09:10Preserving the crime scene did not occur to the police in 1900.

0:09:10 > 0:09:12There was a horse and a cart brought up here.

0:09:12 > 0:09:16- Trampling over evidence.- Yeah, they just wanted to remove the body straightaway

0:09:16 > 0:09:19- and get it to the mortuary. - Did they know who she was when they found her?

0:09:19 > 0:09:21No, no. They had no idea who she was.

0:09:21 > 0:09:24Local gossip led officers to a nearby boarding house,

0:09:24 > 0:09:28called Mrs Rudrum's, where the victim had been staying.

0:09:28 > 0:09:30The only thing that notified the Rudrums

0:09:30 > 0:09:32that she didn't come home that night...

0:09:32 > 0:09:34CHILD CRIES

0:09:34 > 0:09:36..was the sound of Ruby crying the following day.

0:09:38 > 0:09:42The Rudrums lived at 104 of Yarmouth's historic Rows -

0:09:42 > 0:09:46narrow alleyways of medieval houses tightly packed together

0:09:46 > 0:09:49that formed the social heart of Yarmouth in 1900.

0:09:50 > 0:09:54The police arrived to escort landlord John Rudrum to the mortuary

0:09:54 > 0:09:57where he confirmed the dead woman as his lodger.

0:09:57 > 0:10:01The problem was, she was staying under a false name - Mrs Hood.

0:10:01 > 0:10:04When they found out that this was Mrs Hood,

0:10:04 > 0:10:07the police went to the Rudrums and searched her room.

0:10:07 > 0:10:11On the mantelpiece, they found a photograph

0:10:11 > 0:10:14of her on the beach with Ruby.

0:10:14 > 0:10:20So, why was Mary in Great Yarmouth with Ruby using a false name?

0:10:20 > 0:10:22Did Herbert know they were there?

0:10:25 > 0:10:27The barristers are analysing events

0:10:27 > 0:10:30in the week leading up to the murder for clues.

0:10:30 > 0:10:34Mary arrived at Mrs Rudrum's boarding house

0:10:34 > 0:10:37on Saturday the 15th of September -

0:10:37 > 0:10:42a week before her murder, using the alias Hood.

0:10:42 > 0:10:45When she arrived, John Rudrum, the landlord,

0:10:45 > 0:10:51briefly saw a man who he associated with Mary Bennett,

0:10:51 > 0:10:54and then, during the week preceding her death,

0:10:54 > 0:10:57she went out with a man she referred to,

0:10:57 > 0:10:59on a number of occasions, as her brother-in-law.

0:10:59 > 0:11:03On Friday the 21st, the night before she dies,

0:11:03 > 0:11:06Alice Rudrum, the eldest daughter of Mr and Mrs Rudrum,

0:11:06 > 0:11:12overheard Mary talking to a man and hears them kiss loudly.

0:11:12 > 0:11:14We know that that can't have been Herbert Bennett

0:11:14 > 0:11:17because there was evidence that he was at work

0:11:17 > 0:11:20in Woolwich at that time.

0:11:20 > 0:11:22Since splitting from Mary,

0:11:22 > 0:11:25Herbert had found work as a clerk at Woolwich Arsenal.

0:11:27 > 0:11:29Paul has returned to London to visit the area.

0:11:31 > 0:11:33This is where Herbert was employed

0:11:33 > 0:11:36just after he came back from South Africa.

0:11:36 > 0:11:40In 1900, Britain was involved in a war against the Boer states

0:11:40 > 0:11:43over the empire's influence in South Africa.

0:11:43 > 0:11:45It was at this time that Herbert and Mary

0:11:45 > 0:11:48boarded a cruise liner from Southampton.

0:11:48 > 0:11:52They went to South Africa under the pseudonym of Mr and Mrs Hood.

0:11:52 > 0:11:53The trip took about a month

0:11:53 > 0:11:56and they were only in South Africa for about four days

0:11:56 > 0:11:59and then they travelled back here to the UK.

0:11:59 > 0:12:02It was shortly after that that Herbert got the job here,

0:12:02 > 0:12:06at the Woolwich Arsenal, as a clerk, which sparked all sorts of rumours

0:12:06 > 0:12:09about the reason for that trip to South Africa.

0:12:09 > 0:12:12Was he indeed being asked to spy

0:12:12 > 0:12:16on behalf of the Boers against the UK?

0:12:16 > 0:12:18Spy conspiracy or not,

0:12:18 > 0:12:21Mary had used the pseudonym Hood before

0:12:21 > 0:12:24on a suspect trip to South Africa with Herbert.

0:12:24 > 0:12:27Just months later, she used it again

0:12:27 > 0:12:30to conceal her identity in Great Yarmouth.

0:12:30 > 0:12:33On the 22nd - the day of her killing -

0:12:33 > 0:12:35she headed out dressed up

0:12:35 > 0:12:39and met this brother-in-law under a clock.

0:12:39 > 0:12:42And then, at about 9pm,

0:12:42 > 0:12:44Alice Rudrum saw her meeting a man by the town hall.

0:12:44 > 0:12:49What's clear is there was at least one other man, if not more,

0:12:49 > 0:12:53hobnobbing with Mary Bennett in the days leading up to her killing,

0:12:53 > 0:12:55and that's obviously very, very important

0:12:55 > 0:12:57in a backdrop of a situation

0:12:57 > 0:13:00where we don't even know why she was in Yarmouth.

0:13:00 > 0:13:02A really murky picture.

0:13:02 > 0:13:05Testimony given by the Rudrums at trial

0:13:05 > 0:13:08revealed that Mrs Hood received a letter postmarked from Woolwich

0:13:08 > 0:13:10just days before she died.

0:13:10 > 0:13:14And we know that Herbert Bennett was working in Woolwich

0:13:14 > 0:13:16and he was living in Woolwich at the time.

0:13:16 > 0:13:19Yeah, but why, if Herbert Bennett killed Mary Bennett,

0:13:19 > 0:13:22would he have written that letter

0:13:22 > 0:13:24from Woolwich to her address in Yarmouth?

0:13:24 > 0:13:28Surely, that would be a lead to him. That doesn't fit.

0:13:28 > 0:13:30We really don't know, with any certainty,

0:13:30 > 0:13:32what Mary was doing.

0:13:32 > 0:13:35There's a connection with Yarmouth, obviously, for the Bennetts,

0:13:35 > 0:13:37and she was in Yarmouth,

0:13:37 > 0:13:39but beyond that, it's just a mystery.

0:13:42 > 0:13:44Seven weeks after her murder,

0:13:44 > 0:13:48the police finally uncovered Mary's true identity,

0:13:48 > 0:13:51tracing her to Bexleyheath via a laundry label

0:13:51 > 0:13:54found in an item of clothing.

0:13:54 > 0:13:56Herbert quickly came under suspicion

0:13:56 > 0:13:58and was arrested on the 6th of November.

0:14:00 > 0:14:02He told police that, on the night of the murder,

0:14:02 > 0:14:06he was drinking in a pub in Woolwich with two friends,

0:14:06 > 0:14:10but his friends failed to corroborate his alibi.

0:14:10 > 0:14:12He had the wrong weekend.

0:14:14 > 0:14:17Paul has arranged to meet relatives of his great-grandmother

0:14:17 > 0:14:19in that very pub.

0:14:19 > 0:14:22- Hello.- Are you Paul?- I am.- I'm Kim.

0:14:22 > 0:14:24- Hello, Kim.- Nice to meet you. - Nice to meet you. Hello.

0:14:24 > 0:14:27- This is my mother, Deborah. - Hello, Deborah.- Hello.

0:14:27 > 0:14:30- Nice to meet you. - Nice to meet you, too.

0:14:31 > 0:14:35- We are...- We are related. - We are!- We are indeed.

0:14:35 > 0:14:37- Fourth cousins? - It's up that far, yeah.

0:14:37 > 0:14:41I think so. We have William Clarke in common, I think.

0:14:41 > 0:14:43That's correct. That's my great-great-grandfather.

0:14:43 > 0:14:46Both are descendants of William Clarke, Mary's father,

0:14:46 > 0:14:48and Kim has a surprise for Paul that could shed light

0:14:48 > 0:14:51on their ancestor's enigmatic past.

0:14:51 > 0:14:55- So, this is Herbert and Mary Jane. - Oh, wow. How did you come by this?

0:14:55 > 0:14:58Well, I believe this was in William's possession.

0:14:58 > 0:15:00- Right.- So, it's quite important...

0:15:00 > 0:15:02- Yeah, absolutely. - ..to me, in that respect.

0:15:02 > 0:15:04Kim believes this photo was taken

0:15:04 > 0:15:06shortly after Herbert and Mary married,

0:15:06 > 0:15:09whilst on honeymoon in Great Yarmouth.

0:15:09 > 0:15:11They both knew Yarmouth.

0:15:11 > 0:15:13They've both been to Yarmouth as a couple.

0:15:13 > 0:15:16He may have been telling the truth that he wasn't actually in Yarmouth

0:15:16 > 0:15:19at the time of the murder, but we know he'd been up there.

0:15:19 > 0:15:21There was obviously something going on, wasn't there?

0:15:21 > 0:15:25They were nefarious characters. Neither of them was squeaky clean.

0:15:25 > 0:15:28No, no. Something else that's sort of been thrown out there, isn't it,

0:15:28 > 0:15:30- that he was a spy? - I think that was a red herring.

0:15:30 > 0:15:33It would be nice if we could say whether he was definitely guilty,

0:15:33 > 0:15:35or if he was definitely innocent.

0:15:35 > 0:15:36- I'm not sure that will ever happen.- No.

0:15:36 > 0:15:39There might be something conclusive out there. We don't know.

0:15:39 > 0:15:42- Well, yeah. I'd like to see it, if there is, definitely.- Definitely.

0:15:42 > 0:15:46It seems Herbert was regularly a stranger to the truth.

0:15:46 > 0:15:50He HAD been to Great Yarmouth, and more than once,

0:15:50 > 0:15:52as the police would soon discover.

0:15:52 > 0:15:56For now, they had their prime suspect in custody.

0:15:56 > 0:15:57So, did he have a motive?

0:15:59 > 0:16:02Sasha, what would you say Herbert Bennett's motive

0:16:02 > 0:16:05for murdering Mary Bennett was?

0:16:05 > 0:16:09They were a married couple who were estranged.

0:16:09 > 0:16:13There was evidence that their relationship was tempestuous,

0:16:13 > 0:16:16and he was engaged to be married to someone else

0:16:16 > 0:16:19while his wife was still living.

0:16:20 > 0:16:24Upon his arrest, Herbert had asked that his new fiancee,

0:16:24 > 0:16:27a parlour maid called Alice Meadows, be informed.

0:16:27 > 0:16:31Did Herbert want rid of his wife to marry his new love?

0:16:33 > 0:16:36The prosecution were entitled to suggest

0:16:36 > 0:16:40that there was an identifiable motive to kill her,

0:16:40 > 0:16:44to separate himself from a woman he was already separated from.

0:16:44 > 0:16:47But it doesn't really make sense.

0:16:47 > 0:16:52Motive was by no means the central plank of their case.

0:16:52 > 0:16:56And, in fact, you can take out the proposed motive altogether,

0:16:56 > 0:16:59and still have a fairly strong circumstantial case

0:16:59 > 0:17:01against Herbert Bennett.

0:17:01 > 0:17:04Alice Meadows arrived at Woolwich Police Station

0:17:04 > 0:17:08to discover that her new fiance was a married man.

0:17:08 > 0:17:10But she, too, had a revelation.

0:17:10 > 0:17:13Several weeks before the murder,

0:17:13 > 0:17:15the couple had visited Great Yarmouth,

0:17:15 > 0:17:17staying at the Crown And Anchor Hotel.

0:17:19 > 0:17:23News of Herbert's arrest quickly spread through the press,

0:17:23 > 0:17:25who began a campaign to convict him,

0:17:25 > 0:17:28portraying Mary as the innocent victim,

0:17:28 > 0:17:30strangled by her deceitful husband.

0:17:32 > 0:17:36Paul has returned to Great Yarmouth to search the local archive.

0:17:36 > 0:17:41He wants to see for himself how powerful the story was.

0:17:41 > 0:17:44This would appear to be from the Yarmouth Mercury,

0:17:44 > 0:17:47the very first journalist's account

0:17:47 > 0:17:51of the murder of my great-grandmother.

0:17:51 > 0:17:54"The tragedy on South Beach.

0:17:54 > 0:17:59"Suspected case of murder. A mysterious affair."

0:17:59 > 0:18:03Then goes on to reveal the facts as they knew it at the time.

0:18:03 > 0:18:06This was my great-grandmother.

0:18:06 > 0:18:07Sorry.

0:18:16 > 0:18:19They're talking about my grandmother, my great-grandmother.

0:18:29 > 0:18:32What strikes me in this

0:18:32 > 0:18:35is the level of detail that they go to.

0:18:35 > 0:18:38Everything's here in the paper.

0:18:38 > 0:18:42Anybody could come forward with quite a detailed witness account,

0:18:42 > 0:18:45and not actually have even been there.

0:18:45 > 0:18:49You could make yourself a witness in this murder.

0:18:49 > 0:18:52How would anybody be an unbiased juror?

0:18:52 > 0:18:57Herbert had been tried in the paper before they'd even got to court.

0:18:57 > 0:19:01He did not have a very fair trial at all.

0:19:01 > 0:19:02Couldn't have had.

0:19:05 > 0:19:09The man faced with the arduous task of defending Herbert Bennett

0:19:09 > 0:19:13was the eminent barrister of his day, Sir Edward Marshall Hall.

0:19:13 > 0:19:17He insisted the trial be moved to the Old Bailey in London

0:19:17 > 0:19:21in an effort to mitigate the prejudice against his client.

0:19:21 > 0:19:24The case against Herbert relied heavily upon the testimony

0:19:24 > 0:19:27of key witnesses from Great Yarmouth,

0:19:27 > 0:19:29but how reliable were they?

0:19:29 > 0:19:33Herbert Bennett always denied that he was in Great Yarmouth

0:19:33 > 0:19:38on the weekend of the 22nd of September.

0:19:38 > 0:19:43However, he had been staying at the Crown And Anchor

0:19:43 > 0:19:47on two previous weekends not very long beforehand.

0:19:47 > 0:19:50As far as the weekend of the murder is concerned,

0:19:50 > 0:19:55five separate witnesses place Herbert Bennett in Yarmouth.

0:19:55 > 0:19:57Can I just show you where they would have been?

0:19:57 > 0:20:01The first witness is a man called William Borking,

0:20:01 > 0:20:04who was working at the South Quay Distillery -

0:20:04 > 0:20:07very close to where Mary was in lodgings

0:20:07 > 0:20:10at the Rudrums' guesthouse.

0:20:10 > 0:20:15Mr Borking saw a man he identified as Herbert Bennett

0:20:15 > 0:20:19with a woman he identified as Mrs Bennett

0:20:19 > 0:20:24in their distillery between about 9.30 and 10 on the 22nd.

0:20:24 > 0:20:27So, really, within hours of Mary's death,

0:20:27 > 0:20:29he places both of them together.

0:20:29 > 0:20:34We just don't know how accurate or reliable a witness he was.

0:20:34 > 0:20:37He gave very brief evidence, it was damaging,

0:20:37 > 0:20:42but how detailed it was is a matter of concern.

0:20:42 > 0:20:48At about 11.45, two people from the Crown And Anchor,

0:20:48 > 0:20:52Edward Goodrum and a witness called Reid,

0:20:52 > 0:20:55both see Herbert Bennett arrive,

0:20:55 > 0:20:58and he says to Mr Goodrum that he needs to catch

0:20:58 > 0:21:01the 7.20 train the following morning.

0:21:01 > 0:21:04The following morning, we then have a witness

0:21:04 > 0:21:09who sees a man he identifies as Herbert Bennett at the station.

0:21:09 > 0:21:13So, all of these witnesses present a pattern

0:21:13 > 0:21:16of Herbert Bennett's presence in Great Yarmouth,

0:21:16 > 0:21:19and his movements in Great Yarmouth.

0:21:19 > 0:21:21We know that this is a case where

0:21:21 > 0:21:23there were huge problems with the media.

0:21:23 > 0:21:28In the case of Goodrum, he sold his story to the press.

0:21:28 > 0:21:33The judge himself had described the press's coverage of the case

0:21:33 > 0:21:36as a disgrace and a scandal.

0:21:36 > 0:21:40The press had tried, condemned,

0:21:40 > 0:21:42and effectively executed Herbert Bennett

0:21:42 > 0:21:45within 24 hours of his arrest.

0:21:45 > 0:21:48Clearly, they'd done irreparable harm,

0:21:48 > 0:21:53and that has to be the backdrop to historic consideration

0:21:53 > 0:21:56of the safety of the conviction in this case.

0:21:56 > 0:22:00The eyewitness testimony is simply one aspect of this case.

0:22:00 > 0:22:02This is a very strong circumstantial case,

0:22:02 > 0:22:06and each of the strands so far has held together.

0:22:06 > 0:22:09The manner in which witnesses gave evidence in 1900

0:22:09 > 0:22:11gives rise to real anxiety.

0:22:11 > 0:22:13Cross-examination was very brief.

0:22:13 > 0:22:16Issues weren't comprehensively probed.

0:22:16 > 0:22:19The trial was unrecognisable from what it is today.

0:22:22 > 0:22:24Eager to learn more about the man

0:22:24 > 0:22:26who defended his great-grandfather...

0:22:26 > 0:22:28- KNOCK ON DOOR - Come in.

0:22:28 > 0:22:30..Paul has arranged to meet barrister Sally Smith.

0:22:30 > 0:22:34- Hello.- Hello, Paul. It's very nice to meet you.

0:22:34 > 0:22:38She's written a recent biography about Sir Edward Marshall Hall.

0:22:38 > 0:22:39- Come and have a seat.- Thank you.

0:22:40 > 0:22:45- Well, this is fascinating.- Isn't it? - So, you're Herbert Bennett's...?

0:22:45 > 0:22:48- Great-grandson.- Great-grandson. And as you know,

0:22:48 > 0:22:51- Bennett was defended by Sir Edward Marshall Hall.- Yes, yes.

0:22:51 > 0:22:54He was famous for getting more people off the death penalty

0:22:54 > 0:22:55than anyone else ever has.

0:22:55 > 0:22:58- And, of course, he wasn't successful in this case.- No.

0:22:58 > 0:23:01It was undoubtedly one of Marshall Hall's failures.

0:23:01 > 0:23:05Marshall Hall always thought Bennett was a very clever man,

0:23:05 > 0:23:09and he said that the whole hallmark of that murder

0:23:09 > 0:23:11was not that of a clever man.

0:23:11 > 0:23:13You know, there were so many obvious things

0:23:13 > 0:23:15he could've done to cover his tracks...

0:23:15 > 0:23:16- Yes.- ..that he wouldn't do.- Yes.

0:23:16 > 0:23:20And he was convinced of Bennett's innocence.

0:23:20 > 0:23:21Of Bennett's innocence, yes.

0:23:21 > 0:23:23Despite losing the case,

0:23:23 > 0:23:26at a time when there was no recourse for appeal,

0:23:26 > 0:23:28Marshall Hall never gave up the fight

0:23:28 > 0:23:31to save Herbert from the gallows.

0:23:31 > 0:23:34Marshall Hall wrote to the Home Secretary,

0:23:34 > 0:23:37and to an old friend of his, Forrest Fulton.

0:23:37 > 0:23:42"My dear Fulton, I am much concerned about that man, Bennett.

0:23:42 > 0:23:45"Worthless scoundrel though he no doubt is,

0:23:45 > 0:23:47"the more I think of it,

0:23:47 > 0:23:50"the more convinced I am that he never murdered that woman."

0:23:52 > 0:23:54His great difficulty with the case was that

0:23:54 > 0:23:57Bennett wouldn't admit that he'd been to Yarmouth.

0:23:57 > 0:23:59- At all?- At all, ever.

0:23:59 > 0:24:02- Because that was really pretty obviously a lie...- Yeah, yeah.

0:24:02 > 0:24:06..the jury were very unimpressed by the rest of his story.

0:24:06 > 0:24:09Marshall Hall's last-ditch effort to save Bennett failed.

0:24:10 > 0:24:13Herbert's inability to account for his whereabouts

0:24:13 > 0:24:16on the night of the murder cost him his life,

0:24:16 > 0:24:19but was it proof of his guilt?

0:24:20 > 0:24:22Hoping to find an answer,

0:24:22 > 0:24:26Jeremy and Sasha are re-examining the details of the murder itself.

0:24:26 > 0:24:30Does the murder weapon offer any clues?

0:24:30 > 0:24:33Sasha, Mary's body was found on the beach.

0:24:33 > 0:24:37She'd been strangled with a mohair shoelace tied round her neck.

0:24:37 > 0:24:41One knot at the back of the head and one on the left front side.

0:24:41 > 0:24:42It's very curious, isn't it?

0:24:42 > 0:24:48Because a mohair shoelace would not be the first choice of weapon

0:24:48 > 0:24:51if you were planning a murder.

0:24:51 > 0:24:54There is evidence that the shoelace had actually broken at some stage,

0:24:54 > 0:24:56and doesn't suggest to me

0:24:56 > 0:25:01that this was necessarily a premeditated murder.

0:25:01 > 0:25:05So, could Mary have been murdered in an opportunistic attack?

0:25:05 > 0:25:08A young couple on the beach that night,

0:25:08 > 0:25:12Alfred Mason and Blanche Smith, had come forward with information

0:25:12 > 0:25:15of a curious incident in the sand dunes.

0:25:15 > 0:25:20The evidence of Alfred Mason and Blanche Smith

0:25:20 > 0:25:22was that they heard what they thought

0:25:22 > 0:25:27was a romantic encounter on the beach at about 11 o'clock.

0:25:27 > 0:25:31They heard a woman's voice saying, "Mercy, mercy, mercy."

0:25:31 > 0:25:33They didn't interfere because they didn't think that there was

0:25:33 > 0:25:36anything violent or un-consensual taking place.

0:25:36 > 0:25:38But now, looking back at it,

0:25:38 > 0:25:44that that was actually the occasion on which Mary Bennett met her death.

0:25:44 > 0:25:48According to Dr Lettis, who conducted the postmortem,

0:25:48 > 0:25:51Mary had died about 1am.

0:25:51 > 0:25:53And, of course, at that time, the evidence is

0:25:53 > 0:25:57that Herbert Bennett was already back at the Crown And Anchor.

0:25:57 > 0:26:00The medical evidence and the eyewitness evidence

0:26:00 > 0:26:04are at loggerheads. They can't both be correct.

0:26:04 > 0:26:06The testimony of the couple on the beach

0:26:06 > 0:26:09tallies with the eyewitnesses who placed Herbert

0:26:09 > 0:26:12back at the Crown And Anchor by 11.45,

0:26:12 > 0:26:17but the police doctor suggested time of death was later.

0:26:17 > 0:26:20Could this put Herbert in the clear?

0:26:20 > 0:26:23Jeremy and Sasha are seeking the help of Home Office pathologist

0:26:23 > 0:26:25Basil Purdue.

0:26:25 > 0:26:30Basil, knowing what we know today, how reliable would it be

0:26:30 > 0:26:34for a pathologist conducting a postmortem

0:26:34 > 0:26:35at eight o'clock in the morning

0:26:35 > 0:26:39to actually pinpoint the time of death

0:26:39 > 0:26:42as six or seven hours previously?

0:26:42 > 0:26:45First of all, I don't know what the scientific basis was

0:26:45 > 0:26:50for that calculation. It's not made clear at any point.

0:26:50 > 0:26:54Even if one makes allowance for that,

0:26:54 > 0:26:58it has to be said that that narrow a band of time of death

0:26:58 > 0:27:01is completely unreliable.

0:27:01 > 0:27:04Even given the best modern methods of calculation using

0:27:04 > 0:27:09accurate temperature measurements, the bracket is far, far wider.

0:27:09 > 0:27:13And, in any case, pathologists are pretty cautious

0:27:13 > 0:27:15about giving evidence of this kind

0:27:15 > 0:27:18when there are so much better external methods

0:27:18 > 0:27:21of finding these things out that we now have -

0:27:21 > 0:27:24CCTV and phone evidence and things of that sort.

0:27:24 > 0:27:28So, inherently, there's no scientific basis,

0:27:28 > 0:27:33and in a single word, it's baloney.

0:27:33 > 0:27:35Thank you very much indeed.

0:27:35 > 0:27:38So, the only evidence remaining to indicate time of death

0:27:38 > 0:27:40is that of the couple on the beach,

0:27:40 > 0:27:43which supports the case against Herbert.

0:27:48 > 0:27:52But Sasha has just taken delivery of a significant treasured item

0:27:52 > 0:27:54that could be far more enlightening.

0:27:56 > 0:27:59To obtain physical evidence that can be re-examined

0:27:59 > 0:28:03from a case over a century old is extremely rare.

0:28:03 > 0:28:07Jeremy, look at this.

0:28:07 > 0:28:11These are the original exhibits from the trial.

0:28:11 > 0:28:17This is the actual necklace that was found in Mr Bennett's home address.

0:28:17 > 0:28:20It was said at the trial to be the exact necklace

0:28:20 > 0:28:22that Mary was wearing.

0:28:22 > 0:28:25You'll remember this photograph was taken three days before her death.

0:28:25 > 0:28:28So, of course, it was a critical piece of evidence.

0:28:28 > 0:28:29Because if that is right,

0:28:29 > 0:28:33it would appear that the necklace was taken off her

0:28:33 > 0:28:35whilst she was at Great Yarmouth,

0:28:35 > 0:28:39which, again, would point to Bennett being the murderer.

0:28:40 > 0:28:42Given the importance of these exhibits,

0:28:42 > 0:28:45I suggest that it would be really helpful

0:28:45 > 0:28:48to obtain some modern-day expert help

0:28:48 > 0:28:51to see whether this necklace can really be linked

0:28:51 > 0:28:55to the necklace shown in that photograph.

0:28:55 > 0:28:58The barristers have asked forensic experts Harry Smy

0:28:58 > 0:29:03and Maria Maclennan to analyse the photograph using modern techniques.

0:29:04 > 0:29:08Will they be able to say definitely whether the chain worn by Mary

0:29:08 > 0:29:13in the photograph is the same chain found in Herbert's possession?

0:29:13 > 0:29:15We have a very, very small photograph here,

0:29:15 > 0:29:17which is almost impossible to see

0:29:17 > 0:29:20for those of us who don't have fantastic eyesight,

0:29:20 > 0:29:24but you've managed to enlarge it quite considerably.

0:29:24 > 0:29:26We've blown it up to about 75%.

0:29:26 > 0:29:29If we then blur out some of the background material

0:29:29 > 0:29:32so we can focus more on Mary herself,

0:29:32 > 0:29:34and then lighten the area...

0:29:34 > 0:29:36You don't want to go too far, edit it too far,

0:29:36 > 0:29:38where we go to the realms of manipulation,

0:29:38 > 0:29:41to then we're altering what the picture tells us.

0:29:41 > 0:29:44At the time of the trial, magnifying glasses were used.

0:29:44 > 0:29:48How much improved would you say the procedure is today?

0:29:48 > 0:29:49I could give you both a magnifying glass

0:29:49 > 0:29:52to look at the image now, and you may see different things.

0:29:52 > 0:29:55This way, we don't have the same degree of difference as we would,

0:29:55 > 0:29:57say, looking at a picture through a magnifying glass.

0:29:57 > 0:30:02- So, Maria, you are really an expert in jewellery?- Yes.

0:30:02 > 0:30:05So, what we would like from you is an opinion about

0:30:05 > 0:30:11whether this necklace can be matched with the item of jewellery

0:30:11 > 0:30:16worn by Mary on a photograph taken before her death.

0:30:16 > 0:30:19At the trial, there was much contention between

0:30:19 > 0:30:22whether the design that we see in the photo was that of a chain,

0:30:22 > 0:30:25or that of a rope design.

0:30:25 > 0:30:28The design we have here is a chain. We can see the individual links.

0:30:28 > 0:30:30However, I think it's entirely possible

0:30:30 > 0:30:34for either design to be photographed in a way that

0:30:34 > 0:30:37it can be interpreted as one or the other.

0:30:37 > 0:30:40- You've looked at another photograph, Maria, is that correct? - Yes, we have.

0:30:40 > 0:30:42If what we have in this second photograph

0:30:42 > 0:30:46is also the same chain as Mary was seen wearing

0:30:46 > 0:30:49in the beach photograph, we can see a very clear example

0:30:49 > 0:30:54of just how differently an item can photograph in different contexts.

0:30:54 > 0:30:55Looks much thicker, for starters.

0:30:55 > 0:30:57It does, absolutely. Much more prominent.

0:30:57 > 0:31:00Even today, with our more modern procedures,

0:31:00 > 0:31:03we can't use jewellery as a reliable,

0:31:03 > 0:31:06- foolproof piece of evidence.- So, does it concern you that the jury

0:31:06 > 0:31:09were told by one of the experts at the trial

0:31:09 > 0:31:12that the chain here was what can be seen in the photograph?

0:31:12 > 0:31:15It was speculation, and it was opinion at best, I think.

0:31:15 > 0:31:20You're saying that it cannot be said with confidence

0:31:20 > 0:31:22that the item that's seen round Mary Bennett's neck...

0:31:22 > 0:31:27- Yes.- ..on the beach photograph is this original exhibit chain?

0:31:27 > 0:31:28It would be quite dangerous.

0:31:28 > 0:31:31And might perhaps have misled the jury?

0:31:31 > 0:31:32Yes, I think so.

0:31:32 > 0:31:35Something as subjective as this, absolutely.

0:31:35 > 0:31:38- Thank you both very much indeed. - Thank you. Thank you.

0:31:38 > 0:31:41Could this be the breakthrough that Jeremy needs

0:31:41 > 0:31:44to unsettle the original conviction?

0:31:44 > 0:31:47Maria's opinion has made me feel much less certain

0:31:47 > 0:31:51about whether Herbert Bennett was rightly convicted.

0:31:55 > 0:31:59Paul has returned to London for an update on the investigation.

0:32:01 > 0:32:05- Hello, Paul.- Hello.- How are you? I'm going to just put this down.

0:32:05 > 0:32:07He has no idea what valuable evidence

0:32:07 > 0:32:09the barristers have been able to obtain.

0:32:09 > 0:32:12Well, we've had some very interesting discussions

0:32:12 > 0:32:14with people about the evidence.

0:32:14 > 0:32:16But before I tell you any more, I want to show you some things,

0:32:16 > 0:32:19- and you may want to put your glasses on.- Oh, Lord.

0:32:19 > 0:32:22All right, this has to be done with gloves.

0:32:31 > 0:32:35This is the original photograph.

0:32:36 > 0:32:40And even with glasses, I can't see the chain.

0:32:43 > 0:32:45So, wait for this.

0:32:49 > 0:32:53This is Mary's chain.

0:32:53 > 0:32:55- Oh, Lord.- I know.

0:32:55 > 0:32:59This was the chain that was the exhibit in the case,

0:32:59 > 0:33:04and this was the chain that the prosecution witness said,

0:33:04 > 0:33:10with certainty, was the chain that Mary was wearing, all right?

0:33:10 > 0:33:14This was the chain that was found in Herbert's lodgings in Woolwich.

0:33:14 > 0:33:18- Can I touch them?- Put gloves on because it's very precious.

0:33:18 > 0:33:20- If we hold it up just so it can... - I didn't realise it was so long.

0:33:20 > 0:33:22I know. It's very, very lovely.

0:33:25 > 0:33:28- That's gorgeous.- I know. It is.

0:33:28 > 0:33:31- I know!- After all this time...

0:33:32 > 0:33:35There you are. But it's lovely, isn't it?

0:33:35 > 0:33:39- It is. A crucial piece of evidence. - Absolutely.

0:33:39 > 0:33:40Now let me put it here.

0:33:40 > 0:33:43Feel free to touch it, as long as you've got the gloves on.

0:33:43 > 0:33:44- Yeah.- All right?

0:33:44 > 0:33:47- And this is the original photograph? - Mm-hm.

0:33:48 > 0:33:51- That is so tiny.- Mm.

0:33:51 > 0:33:53- And there's my grandma.- Mm.

0:33:56 > 0:33:59- That's amazing. - We've spoken to some experts

0:33:59 > 0:34:01in jewellery and photography,

0:34:01 > 0:34:03and I want Jeremy to tell you the results.

0:34:03 > 0:34:06What's emerged is some very important information.

0:34:06 > 0:34:09The forensic jewellery experts said

0:34:09 > 0:34:13that it wasn't possible to say, with any confidence,

0:34:13 > 0:34:19that this necklace is the one that Mary is wearing on the photograph.

0:34:19 > 0:34:22It went further than that because, in her view,

0:34:22 > 0:34:26it was wrong and dangerous for the prosecution

0:34:26 > 0:34:29to suggest that the jury could be sure.

0:34:29 > 0:34:32And if the prosecution wrongly tried to convince the jury

0:34:32 > 0:34:34that it was the same necklace,

0:34:34 > 0:34:38then that may be an avenue for opening up the case again.

0:34:38 > 0:34:41Yes. It's fantastic.

0:34:41 > 0:34:44I'm just totally blown away, at the moment.

0:34:44 > 0:34:47It's... Oh, my hands can't stop shaking.

0:34:47 > 0:34:52As to how this is going to move the case along,

0:34:52 > 0:34:55I'll have to leave that in the hands of the barristers.

0:34:55 > 0:34:58And, hopefully, they can put as strong a case

0:34:58 > 0:35:00as they possibly can to the judge.

0:35:00 > 0:35:04There are fundamental questions about the safety of the conviction,

0:35:04 > 0:35:06and at the moment, I feel positive, yes.

0:35:06 > 0:35:11None of the new evidence has caused me to feel uncomfortable

0:35:11 > 0:35:13about the safety of these convictions,

0:35:13 > 0:35:16but I would like to look at the trial papers,

0:35:16 > 0:35:19and, in particular, I'd like to look at the judge's summing up.

0:35:21 > 0:35:25Buoyed by the revelation of potential new evidence,

0:35:25 > 0:35:28Paul has one last important visit to make.

0:35:29 > 0:35:33He's arrived with his daughter, Rebecca, at Norwich Prison,

0:35:33 > 0:35:34where Herbert was hanged.

0:35:38 > 0:35:42The prison chaplain has difficult information to show them.

0:35:45 > 0:35:50Now, I can tell you that he was prisoner number 1,622.

0:35:50 > 0:35:52Herbert was the second...

0:35:53 > 0:35:54..person to be executed.

0:35:54 > 0:35:58And here, we have the records.

0:36:00 > 0:36:02Goodness gracious me.

0:36:02 > 0:36:05And he would have immediately been buried.

0:36:05 > 0:36:06- Straight away?- Straight away.

0:36:06 > 0:36:08Removed him from the scaffolding and taken him to...

0:36:08 > 0:36:11- Taken from the scaffold. - ..and out to the burial plot?

0:36:11 > 0:36:13Put in the coffin and taken straight away.

0:36:27 > 0:36:29Now, if we stand on this side, please.

0:36:32 > 0:36:34There's a cross at the top, and it says,

0:36:34 > 0:36:40"12 men were executed in this prison between July 1898 and 1951.

0:36:40 > 0:36:42"Their bodies are buried here."

0:36:42 > 0:36:44- Are they one on top of the other?- No.

0:36:44 > 0:36:47So, there's 12. One, two, three...

0:36:48 > 0:36:50Unmarked.

0:36:56 > 0:36:58- I'll leave you in peace. - Thanks, Father.

0:37:03 > 0:37:05I find that hard.

0:37:10 > 0:37:12It's just horrible.

0:37:18 > 0:37:21I found that tremendously moving.

0:37:22 > 0:37:25And it just makes me even more determined

0:37:25 > 0:37:28to get my great-grandfather exonerated.

0:37:33 > 0:37:35Judgment day has arrived.

0:37:35 > 0:37:38Jeremy and Sasha will soon make their submissions

0:37:38 > 0:37:41before His Honour Judge David Radford.

0:37:41 > 0:37:44For Paul, this could be the start of a legal process

0:37:44 > 0:37:47to clear his great-grandfather's name,

0:37:47 > 0:37:50or the judge could uphold the original conviction.

0:37:50 > 0:37:53- Hello there. Hi again. Nice to see you.- How are you?

0:37:53 > 0:37:55I'm fine, thank you. Nervous.

0:37:55 > 0:37:57It's time for us to go in and see the judge,

0:37:57 > 0:38:00- so follow me, we'll go in.- OK.

0:38:03 > 0:38:07Judge Radford has over 40 years of experience at the criminal bar,

0:38:07 > 0:38:10and sat at the Court of Appeal.

0:38:10 > 0:38:12For this programme, he'll be treating this matter

0:38:12 > 0:38:14as he would any other case.

0:38:16 > 0:38:18We are here this afternoon

0:38:18 > 0:38:22to consider whether the conviction of Mr Bennett

0:38:22 > 0:38:25for murdering his wife in 1900

0:38:25 > 0:38:30is, in my view, a safe or an unsafe conviction.

0:38:30 > 0:38:35- Mr Dein?- It's my submission that this was a weak, questionable,

0:38:35 > 0:38:38and highly circumstantial case.

0:38:38 > 0:38:44Bedevilled by press sensational reporting,

0:38:44 > 0:38:47the kingpin of the prosecution case

0:38:47 > 0:38:54was the finding of a necklace at Mr Bennett's address in Woolwich.

0:38:54 > 0:38:58At trial, the prosecution placed very heavy reliance

0:38:58 > 0:39:03on the proposition that the necklace that was found

0:39:03 > 0:39:06at Mr Bennett's address in Woolwich

0:39:06 > 0:39:10was the necklace worn by Mrs Bennett on the beach.

0:39:10 > 0:39:13However, in the course of this inquiry,

0:39:13 > 0:39:16we've had the benefit of very great assistance

0:39:16 > 0:39:18from two modern-day experts.

0:39:18 > 0:39:22Based on the original exhibits, the evidence of the two experts

0:39:22 > 0:39:27casts very serious doubt on the safety of Mr Bennett's conviction.

0:39:27 > 0:39:30One simply cannot say that the necklace recovered

0:39:30 > 0:39:35from Mr Bennett's lodgings was the one worn in the beach photograph.

0:39:35 > 0:39:38There is more than enough information to suggest that

0:39:38 > 0:39:42the two photographs we have reveal different necklaces,

0:39:42 > 0:39:43and in the circumstances,

0:39:43 > 0:39:46Your Honour should regard Mr Bennett's conviction as unsafe,

0:39:46 > 0:39:49and declare that it ought to be reconsidered.

0:39:49 > 0:39:52- Yes, Miss Wass?- Your Honour, the Crown say that

0:39:52 > 0:39:55this was a compelling circumstantial case.

0:39:55 > 0:39:58There is very clear evidence

0:39:58 > 0:40:01that Mr Bennett was in Great Yarmouth

0:40:01 > 0:40:04at the time that his wife was murdered.

0:40:04 > 0:40:06He was seen in her company.

0:40:06 > 0:40:09He was seen without her within a very short period of time

0:40:09 > 0:40:11of her having been killed.

0:40:11 > 0:40:15- In terms of the publicity and the intervention of the newspapers... - Yes, that's another point.

0:40:15 > 0:40:18..no witness gave evidence

0:40:18 > 0:40:20that they would not have otherwise given,

0:40:20 > 0:40:23and no witness came forward solely

0:40:23 > 0:40:26as a result of press intervention.

0:40:26 > 0:40:28The necklace evidence remains important.

0:40:28 > 0:40:31This is a valuable piece of jewellery,

0:40:31 > 0:40:34not just in terms of its monetary value,

0:40:34 > 0:40:37but also in terms of its sentimental value.

0:40:37 > 0:40:40William Clarke gave evidence,

0:40:40 > 0:40:43he identified the necklace that had been taken

0:40:43 > 0:40:47from Mr Bennett's lodgings in Woolwich,

0:40:47 > 0:40:50and he positively identified the necklace

0:40:50 > 0:40:52as being the necklace that his mother

0:40:52 > 0:40:55had asked him to give to his daughter, Mary.

0:40:55 > 0:40:58And that provides strong support

0:40:58 > 0:41:02that the necklace that was worn on the beach photograph

0:41:02 > 0:41:06was more likely than not to have been the necklace

0:41:06 > 0:41:10that was found amongst the defendant's property

0:41:10 > 0:41:13when he was arrested some time later.

0:41:13 > 0:41:16Yes, well, I'm grateful to both of you for your submissions.

0:41:16 > 0:41:21I now wish to consider them before I reach my own conclusions.

0:41:22 > 0:41:27Sasha has highlighted that a strong case remains against Herbert.

0:41:27 > 0:41:31Paul is unimpressed with Jeremy's submission.

0:41:31 > 0:41:35I wanted to say so much in there. I really wanted to say so much.

0:41:35 > 0:41:37I wasn't given the opportunity to.

0:41:37 > 0:41:41What Jeremy has done, Paul, is exactly the right thing,

0:41:41 > 0:41:44because there's no point in Jeremy saying to the judge,

0:41:44 > 0:41:46"We don't like the verdict."

0:41:46 > 0:41:48No, but we could offer an alternative.

0:41:48 > 0:41:49Well, in fairness to Jeremy,

0:41:49 > 0:41:53he put forward the strongest arguments that there were,

0:41:53 > 0:41:55and I think we've just got to try and wait patiently

0:41:55 > 0:41:58until the judge comes up with a decision.

0:41:58 > 0:42:00- And we don't know what that's going to be.- No.

0:42:01 > 0:42:04Jeremy has presented the only new evidence

0:42:04 > 0:42:06uncovered by the investigation,

0:42:06 > 0:42:10but will it be enough to question the guilty verdict?

0:42:10 > 0:42:12The judge has reached his decision.

0:42:13 > 0:42:15This new evidence,

0:42:15 > 0:42:20which Mr Dein relies on, from the photographic experts,

0:42:20 > 0:42:24may that have rendered unsafe the jury's verdict, which,

0:42:24 > 0:42:29given the very strong cogency, in my opinion, of the other evidence

0:42:29 > 0:42:32that the prosecution were able to rely on,

0:42:32 > 0:42:37properly guided by no less than the Lord Chief Justice?

0:42:37 > 0:42:39I have concluded that

0:42:39 > 0:42:43there was nothing unsafe, in my view, about the verdict.

0:42:43 > 0:42:44I will now rise.

0:42:52 > 0:42:54Well, I'm very sorry about that, Paul.

0:42:54 > 0:42:58I'm really sad that you're going to go away desperately disappointed,

0:42:58 > 0:43:01- but...- Well, it doesn't change anything.- No, it doesn't.

0:43:01 > 0:43:06My mind, on Herbert's innocence, hasn't changed one iota.

0:43:06 > 0:43:09It only can be re-examined on fresh evidence,

0:43:09 > 0:43:11and I do understand that point.

0:43:11 > 0:43:14I just wish it wasn't so limited, that's all.